Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

A Comprehensive Evaluation of Protected Cycling Facilities: Lessons from Five Cities

1,442 views

Published on

Chris Monsere, Associate Professor, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Portland State University

Published in: Education
  • Want to earn $4000/m? Of course you do. Learn how when you join today! ♥♥♥ http://ishbv.com/ezpayjobs/pdf
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Want to preview some of our plans? You can get 50 Woodworking Plans and a 440-Page "The Art of Woodworking" Book... Absolutely FREE  http://tinyurl.com/yy9yh8fu
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Want to preview some of our plans? You can get 50 Woodworking Plans and a 440-Page "The Art of Woodworking" Book... Absolutely FREE ➤➤ http://tinyurl.com/yy9yh8fu
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • I went from getting $3 surveys to $500 surveys every day!! learn more... ●●● https://tinyurl.com/realmoneystreams2019
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Want to preview some of our plans? You can get 50 Woodworking Plans and a 440-Page "The Art of Woodworking" Book... Absolutely FREE ■■■ http://tinyurl.com/yy9yh8fu
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here

A Comprehensive Evaluation of Protected Cycling Facilities: Lessons from Five Cities

  1. 1. Early Adopters of the Protected Bicycle Lane in United States: What Have We Learned? NITC Webinar March 19, 2015 1 Photo credit: Nathan McNeil, PSU Christopher M. Monsere @CMonsere Portland State University Project co-PIs Jennifer Dill, Kelly Clifton, Nathan McNeil Lead GRAs: Tara Goddard and Nick Foster http://bit.ly/nitc_583
  2. 2. Webinar Overview 1. Introduction and Background 2. Methodology 3. Change in Ridership 4. Design 5. Community Support 6. Conclusions 2
  3. 3. Credit: People for Bikes Green Lane Project
  4. 4. Research Objectives • A field-based evaluation of protected bikeways in five U.S. cities to study: – Safety of users (both perceived and actual) – Effectiveness of the design – Perceptions of residents and other road users – Attractiveness to more casual cyclists – Change in economic activity 4
  5. 5. Overview of Sites 5
  6. 6. Green Lane Cities Studied 6
  7. 7. 7 Austin: Rio Grande Street Two-way protected bike lane on one-way street Two-way bikeway One-way vehicle lane
  8. 8. 8 Austin: Bluebonnet Lane Two-way bikeway Two-way vehicles Two-way protected bike lane on a two-way street
  9. 9. 9 Austin: Barton Springs Road One-way protected bike lane on the south side of the road One-way bikeway Two-way vehicles 4 lanes Shared-Use Path
  10. 10. 10 Chicago: N/S Dearborn Street Two-way protected bike lane on one-way street Two-way bikeway One-way vehicle lanes
  11. 11. 11 Chicago: N Milwaukee Avenue Pair of one-way protected bike lanes on a two-way street One-way bikeway Two-way vehicle lanes
  12. 12. 12 Portland: NE Multnomah Street Pair of one-way protected bike lanes on a two-way street One-way bikeway Two-way vehicle lanes with center turn lane
  13. 13. 13 San Francisco: Fell Street One-way left-side protected lane on a one-way street One-way bikeway One-way vehicle lanes
  14. 14. 14 San Francisco: Oak Street One-way right-side lane on a one-way street One-way bikewayOne-way vehicle lanes
  15. 15. 15 Washington DC: L Street One-way protected bike lane on a one-way street One-way bikeway One-way vehicle lanes
  16. 16. Methodology 16
  17. 17. Video Data • Primarily intersections • 3 locations per facility (not Austin) 2 cameras per location • 2 days of video (7am to 7pm) per location • 168 hours analyzed • 16,393 bicyclists and 19,724 turning vehicles observed Example Video Screenshots (2 views) from San Francisco at Oak and Broderick
  18. 18. Surveys • Resident • Mailed to residents living near new protected bike lane(s) • 8 - 12 pages (~40 questions) • 23% response rate overall • Bicyclist • Bicyclists intercepted on facility and directed to online survey – 33% response rate overall 18
  19. 19. Data Used in Analysis Research Element Video Data Bicyclist Survey Resident Survey Count Data Change in Ridership     Design/Safety Evaluation    Barrier Types & Comfort   Community Support  19
  20. 20. Change in Ridership: Safety perceptions and potential riders 20
  21. 21. Change in Observed Bicycle Volumes Source: City-provided before and after counts, PSU video counts, ACS Survey 21 126% 68% 46% 46% 21% 171% 65% 58% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% 140% 160% 180% Rio Grande Multnomah Bluebonnet Fell Milwaukee Dearborn L Street Barton Springs PercentIncrease Before: One-way travel After: Two-way travel Bike lanes prior No bike lanes prior
  22. 22. Before the new facility was built, how would you have made this trip? 22 Source: Cyclist intercept surveys, Green Lane evaluation 60% 38% 34% 32% 29% 18% 11% 6% 21% 7% 10% 10% 6% 6% 7% 10% 17% 55% 56% 56% 65% 75% 80% 83% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Dearborn Rio Grande Multnomah L Street Barton Springs Oak Street Fell Street Milwaukee By bicycle, using this same route Would not have taken trip By other mode By bicycle, using another route
  23. 23. One likely reason: Improved perception of safety 33% 18% 29% 31% 33% 18% 27% 56% 82% 66% 65% 59% 81% 66% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Austin Barton Springs Chicago Dearborn DC L Street Chicago Milwuakie Portland Multnomah SF Oak / Fell Austin Rio Grande Increased Somewhat Increased a Lot 23 Source: Cyclist intercept surveys, Green Lane evaluation I feel the safety of bicycling on ______ has . .
  24. 24. Resident Survey: Potential New Cyclists 24 Strong and Fearless, 5% Enthused and Confident, 27% Interested but Concerned, 43% No Way No How, 25% Share of Residents 43% 62% 85% 37% Strong and Fearless Enthused and Confident Interested but Concerned No Way No How I would be more likely to ride a bicycle if motor vehicles and bicycles were physically separated by a barrier.
  25. 25. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Men Women Men Women Men Women Men Women Men Women Men Women San Francisco Washington DC Chicago Austin Portland Overall Increased Somewhat Increased a lot Because of the ____ Street separated bikeway, how often I ride a bicycle overall has . . . Source: Cyclist intercept surveys, Green Lane evaluation 25
  26. 26. Design: Intersections, Signals, Buffers 26
  27. 27. Design Elements • Intersections – Turning and mixing zones – Fully signalized • Buffers – Type and widths 27
  28. 28. Turning Zone with Post Restricted Entry and Through Bike Lane (TBL) 28 Motor vehicleBicycle Merging Area
  29. 29. Turning Zone with Unrestricted Entry and TBL 29
  30. 30. Mixing Zone with Yield Entry Markings 30
  31. 31. Mixing Zone with Sharrow Marking 31
  32. 32. Mixing Zone with Green Skip Coloring 32
  33. 33. Intersection and Type of Design Direction of Turning Traffic Through Bikes Per Hour Turning Vehicles Per Hour Observed Correct Turning Motorist Observed Correct Through Bicycle % of Bicyclists Agreeing They Feel Safe Turning Zone with Post Restricted Entry and Through Bike Lane (TBL) L Street / 15th Left 110 173 86% 93% 64% Turning Zone with Post Restricted Entry and TBL L Street / Connecticut Left 116 125 88% 89% 64% Turning Zone with Unrestricted Entry and TBL Oak / Divisadero Right 201 126 66% 81% 74% Mixing Zone with Yield Entry Markings NE Multnomah / 9th Right 31 94 93% 63% 73% Mixing Zone with Sharrow Marking Oak / Broderick Right 188 24 48% 30% 79% Mixing Zone with Green Skip Coloring Fell / Baker Left 226 48 49% - 84%
  34. 34. DC Design on M Street (new) 34 Photo from @JenniferDillPSU
  35. 35. Observed Precautionary and Minor Conflicts 35 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 0 200 400 600 800 1,000 TotalConflicts Turning Vehicles When Bike Is Present * Bicycles Thousands Multnomah and 9th Oak Divisadero Oak and Broderick Fell and Baker L and 15th St L and Connecticut
  36. 36. 36 Dearborn and Madison, Chicago, IL Photo: C. Monsere Left-turn signal for cars Bicycle signals
  37. 37. 37 93% 77% 92% 7% 23% 8% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Dearborn/ Congress Dearborn/ Madison Dearborn/ Randolph Waited for green/legal right-turn on red Proceeded illegally on red 84% 90% 92% 10% 5% 6% 6% 6% 2% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Dearborn/ Congress Dearborn/ Madison Dearborn/ Randolph Legal Turn on Green Illegal Turn on Red Arrow Jumped into crosswalk People on Bicycles People in Motor Vehicles
  38. 38. Perceived Safety at Intersections 38 0 20 40 60 80 100 L Street/ 15th Street L Street/ Connecticut Oak/ Divisadero NE Multnomah/9th Oak/Broderick Fell/Baker Chicago - Signalized Percent Feeling Safe Percent Respondents Somewhat or Strongly Agreeing "Feel Safe"
  39. 39. Change in Stated Comfort (from a bike lane), by bicyclist type 1% -1% -5% -2% 7% 6% -1% -1% -4% 1% 10% 9% 24% 24% 31% 50% 48% 60% -10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% A painted 2-3 foot buffer A solid painted buffer A painted buffer and parked cars A raised concrete curb A 2-3 foot buffer and plastic flexposts Planters separating the bikeway PercentIncreaseofNormalizedScore (withastandardbiccylelaneasbase) Strong and Fearless Enthused and Confident Interested But Concerned
  40. 40. Community Support: Motorists, Pedestrians, General 40
  41. 41. Support for Protected Lanes 41 Source: Resident surveys, Green Lane evaluation 95% 79% 78% 76% 75% 69% 75% 97% 88% 82% 84% 80% 79% 83% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Bicycle Foot Transit Mix Non-commuters Car/Truck All Residents Facilities that encourage bicycling for transportation are a good way to improve public health. I would support building more protected bike lanes at other locations. Because of the protected bike lanes, the desirability of living in my neighborhood has increased
  42. 42. Support for Protected Lanes 42 Source: Resident surveys, Green Lane evaluation 66% 45% 43% 47% 36% 39% 43% 95% 79% 78% 76% 75% 69% 75% 97% 88% 82% 84% 80% 79% 83% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Bicycle Foot Transit Mix Non-commuters Car/Truck All Residents Facilities that encourage bicycling for transportation are a good way to improve public health. I would support building more protected bike lanes at other locations. Because of the protected bike lanes, the desirability of living in my neighborhood has increased
  43. 43. Because of the protected bike lanes, the safety of _____ on the street has . . 30% 23% 28% 43% 38% 38% 45% 27% 15% 19% 44% 52% 21% 37% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Washington DC - L St. Chicago, Dearborn Chicago, Milwaukee Austin, Barton Springs Austin, Bluebonnet San Francisco, Oak Portland, Multnomah Percent of Residents Stating “Safety Increased" Walking Driving Bicycling Source: Resident Surveys, Green Lane evaluation 43
  44. 44. Because of the protected bike lanes, the safety of _____ on the street has . . 80% 76% 74% 82% 85% 80% 74% 30% 23% 28% 43% 38% 38% 45% 27% 15% 19% 44% 52% 21% 37% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Washington DC - L St. Chicago, Dearborn Chicago, Milwaukee Austin, Barton Springs Austin, Bluebonnet San Francisco, Oak Portland, Multnomah Percent of Residents Stating “Safety Increased" Walking Driving Bicycling Source: Resident Surveys, Green Lane evaluation 44
  45. 45. Conclusions • Evidence of increased bicycle volumes – Within one year, mostly due to shifting routes • Strong improved perception of safety for people riding on the facilities – May be improving experience for women more than men – Surveys of residents indicate that separation may encourage more cycling 45
  46. 46. Conclusions • Designs choices affect safety and comfort, some worked better than others – Clear demarcation of the merge entry point for vehicles and the use of the “through bicycle lane” performed best – Use of signals effective (highest perception of safety) – Green markings good for communicating paths – Designs with buffers with highest physical separation preferred, though flexpost scored high too 46
  47. 47. Conclusions • Generally positive perceptions for other road users – More negative perceptions are specific to certain streets • Support for the protected lane concept – Road users appear to recognize larger benefits 47
  48. 48. Christopher M. Monsere Portland State University monsere@pdx.edu 48 Questions? http://bit.ly/nitc_583 Thanks to support from: National Institute for Transportation and Communities (NITC), a U.S. Department of Transportation university transportation center, People for Bikes (formerly Bikes Belong) and the Summit Foundation. Thanks to City partners: Mike Amsden (CDOT), David Smith (CDOT), Jim Sebastian (DDOT), Mike Goodno (DDOT), Roger Geller (PBOT), Rob Burchfield (PBOT), Ross Swanson (PBOT), Wendy Cawley (PBOT), Lindsay Walker (Lloyd District TMA), Seleta Reynolds (SFMTA), Miriam Sorell (SFMTA), Annick Beaudet (Austin), Nathan Wilkes (Austin), Aleksiina Chapman (Austin).
  49. 49. Reference List • Monsere, C., J. Dill, N. McNeil, K. Clifton, N. Foster, T. Goddard, M. Berkow, J. Gilpin, K. Voros, D. van Hengel, J. Parks. Lessons From The Green Lanes: Evaluating Protected Bike Lanes In The U.S.. Final Report, National Institute for Transportation and Communities (NITC), NITC-RR-583, June 2014. • Foster, N., Monsere, C., Dill, J., Clifton, K. “A Level-of-Service Model for Protected Bike Lanes” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. X, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2015. In Press. • McNeil, N.M., Monsere, C., Dill, J. “The Influence of Bike Lane Buffer Types on Perceived Comfort and Safety of Bicyclists and Potential Bicyclists” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. X, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2015. In Press. • Monsere, C., Foster, N., Dill, J., McNeil, N.M. “User Behaviors and Perceptions at Intersections with Mixing and Turning Zones on Protected Bike Lanes” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. X, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2015. In Press. • Dill, J., Goddard, T., Monsere, C., McNeil, N.M. “Can Protected Bike Lanes Help Close the Gender Gap in Cycling? Lessons from Five Cities” Paper 15-3481. Proceedings of the 94th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2015. • Dill, J. Clifton, K., Monsere, C., McNeil, N. Measuring and Predicting Behavior Change In Response To New Cycle Tracks. Prepared for the 10th International Conference on Transport Survey Methods Leura, Australia, November 16-21, 2014 49
  50. 50. BONUS SLIDES 50
  51. 51. 78% 25% 97% 72% 28% 73% 32% 56% 37% 6% 89% 1% 5% 7% 93% 7% 48% 89% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Home Owners 2+ Adults in HH Children in HH Driver's License Transit Pass Car Share Membership Own/Lease a car Own working bicycle Female <35 years of age 35 to 54 years 55 + years White Black Hispanic or Latino/a Asian Work Outside Home Work From Home Income >$100k Four year degree + Resident Bicyclist 55% 64% 15% 96% 50% 18% 81% 67% 53% 26% 40% 34% 81% 5% 5% 6% 66% 15% 41% 83% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Home Owners 2+ Adults in HH Children in HH Driver's License Transit Pass Car Share Membership Own/Lease a car Own working bicycle Female <35 years of age 35 to 54 years 55 + years White Black Hispanic or Latino/a Asian Work Outside Home Work From Home Income >$100k Four year degree + 51 Source: Resident and Bicyclist surveys, Green Lane evaluation
  52. 52. Types of buffers used include: Buffer type affects safety and comfort Semi-permanent planter with colored pavement (Multnomah St., Portland) Parked vehicles and flexposts (Milwaukee Avenue, Chicago) Flexposts and painted buffer (Fell Street, San Francisco) 52
  53. 53. 53 Bicyclists: Mean Stated Comfort with Hypothetical Buffers 1 2 3 4 5 6 Solid painted buffer (5) Painted 2-3 foot buffer (3) Painted buffer and parked cars (1) Raised concrete curb (6) 2-3 foot buffer and plastic flexposts (2) Planters separating the bikeway (4) Austin Barton Springs Austin Rio Grande Chicago Dear. Chicago Milw. Portland Mult. SF Oak / Fell Streets D.C. L Street
  54. 54. The buffer effectively separates bikes from cars 54 Disagree, 14% Somewhat Agree, 38% Strongly Agree, 49% Disagree, 5% Somewhat Agree, 32% Strongly Agree, 63% Disagree, 12% Somewhat Agree, 41% Strongly Agree, 47% Disagree, 29% Somewhat Agree, 41% Strongly Agree, 30% "Strong and Fearless" "Enthused and Confident" "Interested But Concerned" "No Way No How" % Disagree
  55. 55. Perceptions of residents driving on street Percent responding increased 55 18% 15% 54% 63% 32% 22% 20% 27% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Barton Springs Bluebonnet Dearborn Milwaukee Multnomah Oak Fell L Street Since the protected bike lanes were built, the amount of time it takes me to drive on this street has . . . Since the protected bike lanes were built, how safe and predictable bicyclists are acting has . . .
  56. 56. Perceptions of residents driving on street Percent responding increased 56 58% 59% 53% 44% 48% 54% 52% 18% 15% 54% 63% 32% 22% 20% 27% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Barton Springs Bluebonnet Dearborn Milwaukee Multnomah Oak Fell L Street Since the protected bike lanes were built, the amount of time it takes me to drive on this street has . . . Since the protected bike lanes were built, how safe and predictable bicyclists are acting has . . .
  57. 57. Perceptions about Parking 57 30% 41% 44% 46% 49% 55% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Multnomah (+20 spots) Dearborn (-minimal) Bluebonnet (-some) L Street (-150 spots) Milwaukee (-some) Oak/Fell (-50 spots) % indicating negative impact on... ability to find a parking spot on the street

×